UK – More UK women are now staying in work as their state pensions start later, and some husbands have changed their employment behaviour too in the wake of the legislative change, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS).
Since April 2010, the age at which women can receive a state pension has risen to 61 years and five months from 60.
It is set to rise to 66 by 2020.
The UK think tank said in a report that the change has had a strong effect in increasing employment among directly affected women.
Between April 2010 and April 2012, employment rates among 60-year-old women have risen 7.3 percentage points, meaning 27,000 more women were in work than otherwise would have been, the report found.
Further, employment rates among their husbands rose by 4.2 percentage points, meaning there were 8,300 more men in work.
The authors of the research – Jonathan Cribb, Carl Emmerson and Gemma Tetlow – suggested men might be delaying their own retirement in order to retire alongside their wives, or be working to cover their wives' lost pension income with extra earnings.
The number of women not in work but looking for work rose by 5,000, or 1.3 percentage points, during the period, according to the research.
The reform also strengthened UK public finances by abound £2.1bn (€2.4bn), the report's authors said.
They said it was difficult to extrapolate these results to see how the further planned increase in pension ages for men and women would play out.
"However, our results suggest future increases in the state pension age will lead to a substantial increase in employment and will strengthen the public finances," they said.
Meanwhile, building products company Wolseley UK is planning to close its defined benefit pension scheme to future service, but says the proposal is not meant to cut costs.
A spokesman for the UK subsidiary of Wolseley said: "We are consulting with employees enrolled on our DB pension plan about our proposals to close the plan to future service, as well as improve the current DC pension plan."
The UK company runs two pension schemes – a DB plan and a defined contribution (DC) plan.
It now aims to provide one common pension and benefits package to all employees, it said, adding that this should be fair, competitive and sustainable.
"This is not a cost-saving measure," the spokesman said. "We do not expect to reduce the amount of money we spend on pensions, and we believe this will give all of our employees the same opportunities to build up a valuable pension as part of their benefits package."
In other news, UK actuaries warned that the government's idea of smoothing assets and liabilities in pension scheme funding valuations would lead to higher deficits in many cases.
In its response to the government's call for evidence on the proposal, the Association of Consulting Actuaries (ACA) said it was not attracted to the introduction of smoothing as envisaged.
The ACA said it would be better for the Pensions Regulator to be more flexible in setting the discount rate, within the current legislative framework.
This might relieve pressure on some UK companies to divert cash from investment in their business, the association said.
David Everett, chair of the ACA pension schemes committee, said: "The regime is flexible enough in concept. The issue is that the Pensions Regulator appears to have chosen to restrict the degree of flexibility within the legislative framework to a degree that the flexibility permitted in legislation is not available in practice."
The association said in its submission that, as the law stands, it ought to be feasible for there to be a range of funding levels and recovery plans fitting into the prudence requirement but allowing some financing flexibility.
The ACA said the "Gilts plus" measure used internally by the regulator to see whether approaches were prudent enough – and to direct trustees implicitly to adopt a Gilts-plus approach – was a partial reading of the regulatory framework, at best.
The framework in fact allows discount rates to be set by reference to either or both Gilt yields or expected investment returns, it said.
"If the Pensions Regulator were to apply a more flexible reading on this single point – the setting of discount rates – then, in effect, this would allow the degree of smoothing we believe sponsors and trustees are seeking," it added.
No comments yet